The toothcleaner most widely used for personal oral hygiene is a toothbrush which usually consists of parallel rows of tufted bristles brushing components. When used, as professionally recommended, at a 45 degree angle to the gum tooth interface and applied with a slight vibrating motion, these conventional toothbrushes are able to efficiently remove plaque only from freely accessible, easily visible cheek side, tongue side and chewing surfaces of the tooth.
Regardless of the many claims of enhanced efficacy, all conventional toothbrushes, including electric toothbrushes, function in the same manner and are inherently inefficient. Their actions, redundant to the natural cleaning mechanism of the mouth, rarely clean better than the abrasiveness of food, salivary dilution, and/or the normal rubbing functions of the tongue, cheek and lips.
Conventional toothbrushes all share a major fault. They tend to hop, skip, jump, and buff over the recessed, hidden areas between the teeth. By doing so, they almost completely miss the sites which harbor the greatest concentration of pathogenic bacterial plaque, the interdental col. When compared with the use of floss or an interdental brush, the plaque removing capabilities of a conventional toothbrush are woefully inadequate.
Currently, flossing is recommended as the most efficient means to clean a healthy, never-diseased mouth. Sadly, few adults floss on a daily basis. Inconvenient, unproductive and difficult to master, the flossing habit is rarely established before the disease process is firmly entrenched. Unfortunately, for those three out of four adults who acquire gum disease, flossing may come too late.
When interdental plaque is not removed by daily flossing or interdental brushing, the body's immune system identifies it as a foreign irritant and tries to destroy it. Since plaque continues to build up after every meal, the body can never completely defend itself. Over a period of weeks, the immune system becomes worn down by the chronic infection. In a last ditch effort, the body produces powerful plaque killing toxins. Unfortunately, the toxins are so powerful that they bore into the gums and supporting bone socket to create a crater like periodontal pocket.
The resultant pocket is less accessible to traditional oral home care. Floss gets "hung up" on the swollen, inflamed gums that occur at the upper edges of the pocket. Floss also tends to span over the invaginated root surfaces that are exposed in the infected interdental col. Without a means of thorough daily cleaning of the pocket, the disease process becomes self perpetuating. Eventually, most of the thick supporting socket is destroyed between the teeth.
Although the conventionally brushed gum tissue and the bone support on the cheek side and the tongue side of the tooth continue to appear healthy, they are but a paper thin facade. Lacking the supporting bone between the teeth, those seemingly firm areas are subject to ruination from just the slightest forces of mastication. Tragically, with its socket gone, a tooth simply falls out of the mouth.
Interdental/interproximal toothbrushes are now recognized as probably the most effective means to address interdental plaque in the mouths of persons with prosthetics, orthodontics and/or periodontal problems. This type of toothbrush is shown in U.S. Pat. No. 3,559,226 to R. L. Burns, issued Feb. 2, 1971, entitled "Tooth Brush For Interproximal Areas", U.S. Pat. No 4,222,143, to E. B. Tarrson et al., issued Sep. 16,1980, entitled "Interproximal Brush Handle", U.S. Pat. No 4,395,943, to P. Brandli, issued Aug. 2, 1983, entitled "Interproximal Toothbrush". Such toothbrushes are generally made of a pair of thin twisted wires with nylon like bristles of variable stiffness, captured by the wires and extending radially from the wires. In some of these toothbrushes the bristles are of various lengths, in the form of a cone, with the tip of the cone having the shortest bristles being at the end of the twisted wires. These interdental toothbrushes are small, about the diameter of a pipe cleaner, are disposable, and are often used in conjunction with a toothbrush handle.
Interdental toothbrushes, by virtue of the fact that they ARE a "toothbrush", are familiar and rapidly assimilated by the average user. Easy to master and visibly more productive than floss, they can navigate deep into the interdental col and its hidden invaginated root walls to bring up identifiable plaque. This feedback mechanism provides the tangible evidence that encourages the brushing habit.
Used daily, interdental brushing eliminates plaque. With the bacterial irritant missing, the exaggerated immune response subsides and the swollen tissue that surrounds the col shrinks to eliminate the periodontal "pocket". Although the contour of the col rarely regenerates to its pre-diseased morphology, it does become more open, accessible and easier to maintain.
Considering that disease elimination, along with stabilization and maintenance, are currently recognized as the ideal outcomes of periodontal therapy, interdental brushing can be considered a conservative, inexpensive, noninvasive and natural cure for gum disease.
Among other applications, the interdental toothbrush is utilized in daily personal hygiene to clean orthodontic appliances, fixed bridgework and implants. Additionally, it is ideal for the physically challenged, for whom flossing may be impossible.
Heretofore, it was recommended that the interproximal brush, as a plaque removing instrument, be pushed horizontally through an open interproximal space to remove supragingival (above the gum) plaque. I have found that when the brush tip is angled apically, 45 degrees to the long axis of the tooth, it can safely and more efficiently disrupt plaque from the deepest subgingival aspects of the interdental col. This new application has been very successful reducing or eliminating periodontal infections missed by previously taught techniques.
Additionally, a sonically resonating brush provides greater safety, efficacy, and economy than a manual action brush. Such a sonically resonating brush is shown in U.S. Pat. No. 5,123,841, to D. E. Millner, issued Jun. 23, 1992, entitled "Interproximal Dental Plaque Remover". A sonically resonating interdental brush burrows safely along the path of least resistance to the deepest part of the pocket. Without the poking action of a manual brush, fragile disposable tips bend less and last longer. Of greatest merit, a vibrating brush produces a sonic cavitation effect. Its energized bristles strike plaque off the tooth surface hundreds of times per application.
Furthermore, unlike conventional toothbrushes, interdental brushes need to be rinsed clean after each of the 28 "between the teeth" sites that potentially can be accessed during a brushing session. The hygienic removal of plaque from the brush tip, normally performed by manually rubbing it under water, is enhanced by the vibrating brush's ability to rapidly clean itself off under the tap.
Although most of the interdental brushes mentioned in the prior art are of a functional design, their handles/holders left much to be desired. To firmly secure the interdental brush tip to a handle, many of the brush designs require a severe right angle bend at the end of the twisted wire. For example, see U.S. Pat. No. 3,559,226 to R. L. Burns, issued Feb. 2, 1971, entitled "Interproximal Brush Handle", and U.S. Pat. No 4,710,996 to E. B. Tarrson et al., issued Dec. 8, 1987 entitled "Interdental Brush Handle" as showing a few such designs. Bending the wire of the brush as required in the designs of these patents makes it difficult to replace worn out brushes.
It has been found that the replacement of interdental brushes can be required as frequently as daily for inexperienced users or up to bimonthly for experienced users. Thus, it is necessary to be able to easily and quickly replace the brushes in the holder. Therefore, it would be most desirable to have a handle for an interdental brush which allows the brushes to be replaced in the handle easily and quickly.
Additionally, a number of recently developed interdental toothbrushes include hinges which must be flexed and joints which must be opened and closed many times over the lifetime of its handle in order to replace an interdental brush. Examples of such type of interdental toothbrushes are shown in U.S. Pat. No. 5,029,358 to W. Zimmerman, issued Jul. 1, 1991, entitled "Interproximal Brush", and U.S. Pat. No. 5,201,091 to E. B. Tarrson et al., issued Apr. 13, 1993 entitled "Toothbrush". It has been found that the opening and closing of these anchorages, as required in the designs of the above patents, can expose their fragile junctures to premature failure from improper use. Thus, it is necessary to have an interdental brush holder that can sustain moderate abuse from the average user. Therefore it is desirable to have a handle for an interdental brush that is strong and will not fall apart when replacing interdental brush tips.
Furthermore, a variety of interdental cleaning tips are now commonly available. Although most conform to a standardized format, some do not. Some may not even be made with bristles but rather with a rubber like foam inserted over a plastic stem that is longer and thicker than that attached to most bristled interdental brushes. These brushes may not be able to be used as desired in the designs of U.S. Pat. No. 5,201,091 to E. B. Tarrson et al., issued Apr. 13, 1993 entitled "Toothbrush". Thus, it is necessary to have an interdental brush holder that can accommodate brush stems of varying lengths. Therefore, it is desirable to have an interdental brush holder that is designed to accommodate various replacement tips.
Additionally, interdental brush holders having a sleeve/shaft arrangement, such as U.S. Pat. No. 4,030,199 to J. R. Russell, issued May 12, 1975, entitled "Handle For Disposable Appliance", and U.S. Pat. No 4,222,143 to E. B. Tarrson et al., issued Sep. 16, 1980 entitled "Interproximal Brush Handle", lock their interdental brush tip stems to the handle through unregulated frictional force. When the stem of an interdental brush tip is engaged as desired in such designs, users are unable to determine if the stem is over or under secured to the handle. If the stem is under secured it may come loose in a user's mouth. If it is overly secured, it may prevent the replacement of fresh tips, thereby rendering even a new brush handle useless. Thus, it is necessary for a sleeve-based interdental brush holder to have a defined, positive lock to allow a user to determine if a stem is properly secured to the handle. Therefore, it is desirable to have an interdental brush holder that not only has a defined positive lock but such a lock should signal to the user visibly and/or audibly that it has engaged and has accurately secured the stem of the interdental brush tip.